Reviewer Guidelines

About Journal

Focus and Scope

JIPRO focuses on legal studies related to intellectual property (which refers to creations of the mind, such as inventions; literary and artistic works; designs; and symbols, names and images used in commerce) in various scientific fields. These studies highlight the importance of knowledge and its application, with the aim of raising public awareness and improving societal well-being. Therefore, JIPRO welcomes articles on Intellectual Property Rights (IPR), including but not limited to Industrial Property (rights to inventions, trademarks, designs, trade secrets, plant variety) and Copyright (literary and artistic works like books, music, films, software), as well as communally owned intellectual property (such as traditional cultural expressions, traditional knowledge, geographical indications, genetic resources).

Open Access Policy

The works in this journal are openly licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License (CC BY-SA 4.0).

This license grants readers the freedom to:

Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format
Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially under the following conditions:

Attribution
Readers must give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and JIPRO, provide a link to the CC BY-SA 4.0 license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/), and indicate if changes were made. Such credit must not imply endorsement by the licensor.
ShareAlike
If readers remix, transform, or build upon the material, they must distribute their contributions under the same CC BY-SA 4.0 license.
No Additional Restrictions
Readers may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from exercising the rights granted by the license.

Journal History

JIPRO was initiated and launched in mid-2018 to support the publication of scholarly work related to law and intellectual property rights, specifically targeting academics at universities with a focus on intellectual property studies. Since its inception, JIPRO has evolved to meet the evolving standards of professional journal management by facilitating the publication of credible scientific articles that contribute significantly to the spread of knowledge, especially concerning law and intellectual property rights. Consequently, continuous efforts are made to enhance and upgrade publication management quality, adhering to current regulations and recognized best practices within the realm of scholarly publishing.

Archiving

Articles published by this journal are archived in the PKP Preservation Network (PN).

Invitation to Review

Manuscripts submitted to JIPRO undergo a review process involving a minimum of two experts. These reviewers may be volunteers, members of the Reviewers Board, or individuals proposed by the academic editor during the initial assessment. They are tasked with assessing the manuscript's quality and advising the editor on whether it should be accepted, modified/revised, or rejected. We request that invited reviewers promptly accept or decline any invitations after reviewing the manuscript title and abstract. Should they need to decline, we ask that they propose alternative reviewers. Additionally, if more time is necessary to complete a thorough report, reviewers should promptly request an extension.

Potential Conflicts of Interest

Reviewers are requested to disclose any possible conflicts of interest and contact the journal's Editorial Office if uncertain whether an issue constitutes such a conflict. Potential conflicts include: working in the same institution as an author, having been a co-author, collaborator, joint grant holder, or maintained any academic connection with an author within the last three years, or having close personal relationships, rivalries, or animosities towards an author. Additionally, any financial benefit or detriment resulting from the paper's publication, as well as non-financial biases—such as political, personal, religious, ideological, academic, intellectual, commercial, or others—should be disclosed. It is crucial to report conflicts that might suggest bias for or against the paper or its authors. Notably, reviewing a manuscript previously assessed for another journal is not considered a conflict. In such cases, reviewers are invited to inform the Editorial Office whether the manuscript has improved since its last review. Moreover, reviewers are encouraged to consult the relevant sections in the Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

Review Reports

The following are the guidelines for the review report: Read the entire article and any supplementary material, focusing on figures, tables, data, and methods. Provide a critical analysis of the article and its key concepts, with detailed comments to help authors understand and address your points. Avoid recommending citations of your own or others' work unless it clearly enhances the quality of the manuscript. Do not suggest excessive self-citations or citations to increase metrics. Ensure references improve the manuscript. Maintain a neutral tone and offer constructive criticism. Derogatory comments are not acceptable.

Review reports should include the following. A summary of the objective, contributions, and strengths of the paper. General concept comments: (1) Article: note weaknesses, method inaccuracies, etc. (2) Review: assess the coverage, relevance, knowledge gaps, and suitability of the references. Comments should focus on scientific content and be specific for the author's response. Specific comments should address inaccuracies in text, tables, or figures, still focusing on scientific content rather than language issues, which can be corrected later.

Guide Questions for Article Reviews: Is the manuscript clear, relevant, and well structured? Are references recent (within 10 years) and relevant without excessive self-citations? Does the article sound scientific? Are results repeatable with available methods? Is the analysis clear and easy to interpret? Is data interpretation consistent throughout? Are the conclusions aligned with the findings presented? Assess the adequacy of the ethical.

Rating the Manuscript

During the review of the manuscript, rate the following: Novelty: Is the question original and advancing knowledge? Scope: Does it fit the journal's scope? Significance: Are results or discussions significant and conclusions supported? Quality: Is the article well-written and analysis presented correctly? Scientific Soundness: Is the analysis design sound with replicable results or discussion? Reader Interest: Are the conclusions appealing to the audience? Overall Merit: Does it benefit the field, address key questions, or present consistency of analysis? English Level: Is the language clear and understandable?

Manuscripts for JIPRO must adhere to high publication ethics, reporting only unpublished, original results, and properly citing reused text. Research should follow accepted ethical research standards. Reviewers must immediately report any misconduct, plagiarism, or unethical behavior to the editor.